Donald Drumpf

I've watched the rise of a wealthy, ridiculous yet frightening blowhard with disbelief. And kept waiting for someone, anyone, to point out the screamingly obvious.

Thank you, John Oliver. You came through.

If my Internet would cooperate and let me post it without a link I would  - but view it at this link:

MakeDonaldDrumpfAgain

I wanted to stand up and cheer. Instead I posted it everywhere I could think of.

This isn't a short segment. But every single word is worth hearing, particularly if you're amused by our reality-show presidential candidate. He is not funny. His popularity is a frightening sign of the increasing madness of this country. Perhaps it is too late for us; perhaps we're too far 'round the bend.
But maybe not. Maybe all we need to do is remember that Trump is just a made up name.

The damage he can do, however, is very very real.

Rally to Restore Sanity - Isn't This News?

I'm watching a live feed of the Rally to Restore Sanity and/or Fear. The Washington Mall is packed with thousands of people, all laughing, singing and smiling. News reports indicated that more than a thousand related rallies in foreign countries have been organized by US expatriates. There are thousands more rallies in communities across the country.
But it's not news.
Network news, the nation's "top" newspapers and good old NPR made the decision not to cover this event.
Let's see - thousands of people converge on the mall to sing "It's the Greatest, Strongest Country in the World", a satirical and very funny tribute to the flaw in both sides of the liberal/conservative debate; watch musical acts (I saw the O'Jays and were they dressed to kill!) and pay tribute to some people who made headlines for their civil behavior - and that's not news. Kid Rock and Sheryl Crow actually performed a song about frustration with our society that was good spirited and kind.
Now of course, the "news" outlets are going to have to cave in lest they look ridiculous. But how sad they even tried to avoid reporting on a truly positive event.
As Mick Foley just said, "Civility is cool."
But apparently only fear, loathing and paranoia are news.

Schumer and the Public Option - Did I Say It Was Dead?

We don't pay much attention to what politicians say anymore, which leaves them free to flip and flop at will. Senator Charles Schumer, the senior Democrat from New York, has assumed the mantle of the Champion of the Public Option. I get action alerts from progressive groups asking me to write to him, encouraging him to continue his "strong" support for the public option in health care reform.

I'd like to point out one fact - he bailed on the public option back in early September. I am glad he's apparently trying again, but it galls me that no one's pointed out that he'd already left the building.

Here's what the Daily Kos got..

Chuck Schumer explains exactly how Harry Reid can get the public option passed through the Senate:

"SCHUMER: I am very optimistic that we're going to get a strong public option. The House is standing firm on public option. And I think all of those, when they saw the vote in the finance committee who thought, "Oh, it's over," hadn't really read the situation correctly.

STEWART: Well, how do you get it done? How does it end up in the final bill?

SCHUMER: Well, first, Leader Reid has the option of putting it in the final bill. If he puts it in the final bill, in the combined bill, then you would need 60 votes to remove it. And there clearly are not 60 votes against the public option. If -- and so, we're urging him to do that and he's seriously considering it.

Once it passes the Senate, if that were to happen, it's in the House bill, it's in the Senate bill, and it would have to be in the final product. So, it's very important to see if the public option is in the bill that Leader Reid puts together. He hasn't yet made up his mind, but many of us who believe in the public option are urging him to do so. And so far, we're getting -- we're getting heard.

Note that Schumer says Reid still hasn't decided what path he will take on the public option. That's not a very big deal if Reid has already made up his mind and just hasn't told anyone so that he can play his cards close to his chest. But if he really still hasn't decided whether or not to include the public option in the Senate bill, what in the world is holding him back? The public option is one of the single most popular elements of health care reform. It's a good idea, it's good politics, and it's time to get the job done."

http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:09fQP37O1k6qaM:http://dealbreaker.com/2009/07/31/Schumer.jpg

And here's Jon Stewart, the only sane man on television, wondering what the hell the Democrats are doing.


http://www.indecisionforever.com/2009/10/01/jon-stewart-to-congressional-dems-youre-a-fing-idiot/

Let me add a note here because this is really nagging at me. Schumer declared the public option dead weeks ago. With great authority. I saw it. It was a little press conference at a housing complex near the Hudson River and no one but the local yokels were there (which explains my presence).

I asked about health care reform. He very clearly, distinctly and absolutely declared the public option dead. Feel free to listen. Wait for it - it's toward the end.

Schumer declares Public Option DOA.

I feel better now. It's good to know who is who.

NBC Tries to Hush the Cramer/Stewart Discussion?

Just found this - and if it doesn't add weight to my argument that today's "news" just isn't news anymore, I don't know what will.

http://www.politicususa.com/en/NBC-Censors-Cramer-Stewart

So Just What Is the Media's Role?

I watched the Stewart vs. Cramer Daily Show last night. I'm sure it was a mighty audience. Many of them were disappointed. It wasn't all that funny. It was, instead, another battle in Jon Stewart's crusade to get the media to do its job.

It's the underlying message of his show every single day, yet many viewers probably lose that message because basically, it's just funny.

Stewart's serious. He always has been. When he took on Tucker Carlson and CNN's "Crossfire" he was practically pleading. He wants news. He wants the media to do what we used to believe it does - objectively report the news, investigate what it's told and let us know what is true and what isn't.

Instead, what we have is an alphabet of talking heads all spouting their own view of things and we tune into whoever says what we like to hear. I know it. I know that when I watch Rachel Maddow she's preaching to the choir. I watch Lou Dobbs and want to throw socks at the television. I watch Fox News and wonder if perhaps I have a high blood pressure problem.

So, Stewart asks, where are the watchdogs?

CNBC is the NBC financial network. It has the supposed experts who offer advice to investors. And that's the bottom line, according to Stewart. Who are they talking to?

Is CNBC there to benefit the investor insiders, winking and touching fingers beside their noses as they share information based on lies that influence how the poor schmucks at home invest their money? Is CNBC there to offer the best advice it can to all investors? Is CNBC a watchdog inside the guarded gates? CNBC doesn't really know, according to Jim Cramer.

Cramer admitted the network could have done a better job investigating what it was told, could have been more careful about the advice it offered. Cramer sounded almost contrite when confronted with an interview in which he reveals the depth of his understanding of how to manipulate the market.

The whole confrontation was certainly great press for Cramer. How many people will now watching his show to see if he makes good on his promise to become a better watchdog for the public? But can you trust a thing CNBC does? Why should you?

And that, I'm betting, makes Jon Stewart a very sad funny man.





http://news.bostonherald.com/track/celebrity/view/2009_03_13_Jon_Stewart_hammers_Jim_Cramer_on__The_Daily_Show_/srvc=home&position=7

Why I Love Rachel Maddow

I'm no groupie. I'm not a gay activist. I hate television and I hate myself when I sit in front of it, mindlessly flipping around.

But I love Rachel Maddow and an hour with her makes me feel pretty damned good about our chances.

Rachel, if you have somehow missed her, is the snarky host of MSNBC's The Rachel Maddow Show. She's got a radio show on Air America. She's the smart ass kid you wanted on your softball team, and she's all grown up and poking holes in political stupidity - no matter what side of the aisle it's on.

Ignore what MSNBC's done to make her acceptable to mainstream America - turned a shortstop into a glamor girl with flappy eyelashes. Listen to her.

She's intelligent, she backs up her opinions with fact, and she cares. When she's outraged, she doesn't mince any words. But she never descends into shrill rants. Take a note, Fox News. Aw, let's be even handed here - Keith Olbermann might want to borrow a page from his protege as well.

Last night, Rachel discussed the stimulus.

She devoted her show to debunking what she called "bull pucky" arguments against the stimulus plan, and arguing against the compromises that were made to get it past the GOP objections.

She gave facts and figures showing that tax cuts don't stimulate the economy nearly as well as infrastructure spending and funding food stamps. And she was clearly outraged that common sense gets shouted down by partisan fighting. She cited studies I've heard before but she gave them a national voice, and she said what I've been thinking myself. If Congress can't shut up, grow up and get to work bailing out this boat, it's time to toss them overboard.

And I'm predicting when this time passes, when history looks back, Rachel Maddow, along with Jon Stewart, are going to prove to be two of the most important voices for this era.









http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/

What I Learned From the Election

Now that the dust has nearly settled (we still don't know about that filibuster-proof Senate yet, do we?) I've realized I've gotten a lot of lessons from the election of 2008. And I'm a big believer in taking note of lessons learned, since if you ignore them they tend to come up over and over.

1. People are easily scared: Hillary's three ayem phone ad was, according to polls, actually effective. Obama was seen as the less-steady hand, the shaking newby who would crack under pressure. Seems pretty silly now, doesn't it? The man's proving to be a rock - and a confident one.

2. Scared people get angry: Once the fear of Obama was spread around thickly enough, people reacted with anger. Who can forget the Republican crowds screaming "terrorist!" "Kill him!" And that anger turned against John McCain when he tried to reassure them they had nothing to fear from an Obama presidency. And these were his supporters!

3. Scared people will latch onto things that make them feel safer. Conservatives clutched Just Sarah From Wausilla to their hearts. She was young, she was pretty and she was absolutely certain everything was going to be okay. Progressives held Obama equally tight. Ditto. Luckily for Just Sarah, she's not going to be held accountable for this poop soup that used to be our economy. Our president-elect, you must admit, is a brave soul. I wouldn't want to take this job on.

4. Even scared people can be won over. I have some very conservative relatives. One of them will also freely admit to being a racist. So imagine my surprise when, in a recent conversation, he told me he "didn't think too badly of Obama" anymore. "He's certainly smart," he told me, "and he seems to be sincerely trying to fix things. I wish him well and hope he can do it." Score one for the Obama Team.

5. The people in charge don't necessarily know more than I do. It's a holdover from childhood - this assumption that if you're in charge, you must know more than me. You'd think that eight years of George W. Bush would have beaten that out of me. But it took Hank Paulson to do it once and for all. The poor man is clearly in way over his head - he's trying to come up with a rescue plan without a firm handle on what might work and a mandate to take care of old pals....but don't forget to not totally alienate public opinion! Remember that old Star Trek episode where Kirk used logic to short out the bad robot? "You say you are lying, but you tell the truth..." Paulson's conflicting imperatives are forcing a series of epic flip flops and I am expecting to soon see steam coming from his ears as his circuits overheat. I believe this problem is going to take a committee - a bunch of smart people bouncing it around until they come up with a plan...not a unilateral fix that is politically expedient. Score another for the Obama Transition - the team's gelling.

6. The media is ridiculous. Yes, I know. I'm one of them. But really. It's downright embarrassing. Because cable and satellite have created a 24 hour news cycle, the news shows most resemble a bunch of old people sitting around a table hashing and rehashing the same topic as they play canasta. "Is this change or just more of the same?" "Should Obama be keeping a lower profile?" "Is Obama taking charge too soon?" "Which dog will the Obama's get?"
It's the same stuff over and over and over and there's rarely anything new. When there is, everyone pounces on it like a pack of dogs in an alley. Pretty soon it's so mangled there's nothing left but a little bone.

7. Rachel Maddow and Jon Stewart rock. Jon Stewart is my favorite media watchdog. He's smart, he's willing to take on the people he likes as well as the ones he disagrees with, and he's essentially good hearted. This man brought on the tightly wound Bill O'Reilly and offered him not a tongue lashing, but a cup of cocoa and a teddy bear. It was a dig, but there was an element of sincerity. Stewart's essential warmth (remember him after 9-11) and obvious idealism make him the critic with a heart. And man, does the media need to be watched. Opinion masquerades as news everywhere now.
Maddow has a similar warmth. She may be progressive, she may be snarky, but she's human. When she says she's been waiting years for infrastructure to get sexy, you know she means it - and she's thrilled that it's happening. She's not standing on the sidelines jeering, she's emotionally in the middle of things and talking about things that she believes matter. I can't watch the news much now - it makes me twitch. But Stewart and Maddow still tell me what they're thinking most nights.

8. I Don't Know Much. I never thought I knew much...lots of people had more information and lots more opinions. I've come to realize I know very little - and any opinions I hold are subject to change as more information becomes available. I think the good thing is once you know you don't know much, you're willing to listen and learn. I'm listening.

What Must the World Think of Us?

I've been wondering as I look at reports on Google Analytics that tell me people all over the world have read this blog - what must they think?
Not about me personally - chances are a reader in Micronesia wouldn't feel much different than my next door neighbor. But what about America?
Until just a few years ago I'd never really left the country. Not for lack of desire - it was lack of opportunity and lack of funds. But finally, as a gift to my newly 18 year old son, I hopped a plane and we explored Paris, Rome and some of the small hill towns between Rome and Florence.
It was life changing.
I never considered myself parochial. I've been to most of the states in the US. I've been to Canada (and loved it). I always knew there was a much larger world beyond this country and I longed to get to know it. But I didn't know. I really didn't.
The sense of history, the thrill of hearing everyone around you speak a language you barely understand, the mind shift that occurs when you are truly in a strange land (no matter how Westernized), the chance to sit and watch human beings living a life much like your own, yet somehow very different; it thrilled me and left me often gaping stupidly or grinning like an idiot.
I like my country. It's been good to me and my family. But I'm horrified by the latest GOP campaign tactic - pointing out the 'real' America as opposed to the rest of America.
Jon Stewart handled it beautifully this week - he was clearly offended and he had every right to be. New York City, that hotbed of liberal elitists, is where America suffered its worst terrorist attack ever. And to say that New Yorkers aren't 'real' Americans, to imply that only small town conservatives qualify as 'real' Americans, is to spit on Ground Zero and every family that lost someone in that attack.
So we're fighting among ourselves...not the Blue and Gray anymore, but the Blue and the Red. And our friends around the world, as well as our enemies or those who just don't trust us, are watching us squabble like kids at a toybox. We look immature. We look petty. And we are.
I'm tired of hearing cheerleaders for divisiveness. I don't want to hear any more booing, jeering, no more pep rallies for hate and fear.
I am an American and I want to be able to be proud when I say that. It's time to start acting our age.

Thank God for Comedy Central

The Depression had Will Rogers. We've got Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert.



I've loved Jon Stewart since September 11, 2001. He's a real mensch. And he loves this country, despite the fact that he skewers its hypocrisies on a nightly basis. He strikes me as a man with a conscience.

Colbert took me a lot longer. He's a loud, bratty kid. He's cute as hell and he knows it. That can get old.

But the economic crisis has brought out the best in both of them. They're poking fun at the candidates, at the media, and pointing out just how stupid most of the 'solutions' we're being offered are.

I watch CNN a lot. But I'm glued to the television for The Daily Show and The Colbert Report. After a day of reporting on the news, talking to people counseling homeowners in foreclosure, hearing our local congressman rail against the corruption and ineptitude of our government and seeing people lining up at the convenience store buying lottery tickets by the fistful, I need a laugh.

This is Progress?

At first glance, it might seem remarkable that the Republicans are the ones that have a woman on the ticket this year. But look at how they're marketing her: "The Hottest Governor from the Coolest State." I feel a little sick.

I'll admit it - the political scene is suddenly riveting. The Republicans are infatuated with their new VP candidate and the word is out that the Democrats are enlisting Hillary Clinton to take her on.

If I wasn't a believer that women have truly been an oppressed group before, this does it. Think about it: it may have taken decades to get a major party to endorse a black candidate for president...but once he's in the running the race question can, for the most part, be skirted. Yes, there was the whole Jeremiah Wright thing and once in a while someone tosses out a yellow flag on 'The Race Issue'...but except for one mind-bogglingly stupid Georgia legislator who referred to the Obamas as "uppity", Barack Obama and John McCain can debate as two legislators running for president.

But despite Sarah Palin's nasty, dismissive attacks on her opponents, they have to be very, very careful how they respond to her. Because she's a woman.

There's plenty of ammo, to be sure. She jeered at the notion of public service. She exaggerated her own accomplishments as governor, misstated facts to make herself sound more important. She refers to her daughter's decision to have her baby as a "choice" while advocating denying that choice to millions of others. She's got some scary secessionist ties and a record of dismissing environmental concerns as she entreats us to "pray for more oil drilling." This woman is an extremist with very little experience - and the McCain campaign brought her on board knowing that she could become president by default. That political decision speaks volumes about the McCain campaign's concern for this country's future. It's clearly a game and what matters is winning.

But the Obama campaign will have to tread carefully as it pushes back. They know all too well how easily a statement can be turned into a sexist dig...and the media is not only looking for it, but practicing it. I was not a fan of the Hillary Clinton candidacy, but I certainly felt for her when newspeople made cracks made about her clothes, about her emotion (or lack of it) , complained that she was a whiner or had an annoying voice. These are the kinds of remarks that never, ever get made about a male candidate. But Clinton had to slog through that minefield.

If Joe Biden comes down too hard on Palin, he'll be seen as picking on her. Any rebuttals will be examined for sexist language. So it's going to take a woman to do the Democrats' dirty work. And they're calling on Clinton.

She's more than capable. But the fact that she's needed is an eye-opener. The Republicans don't need to find a powerful black Republican to attack Barack Obama. The language allows them to do it without playing the race card. The Democrats have a much more difficult time of it...our language is full of terms that could be seen as sexist. Just about anything we say that refers to someone weaker or less powerful, anything dismissive or condescending...it usually can be interpreted to be sexist - whether we mean it to be or not. And that's indicative of how women are seen in our culture. So it's going to take Hillary Clinton and other strong Democratic women to say what needs to be said about Sarah Palin. Because whenever a man criticizes a woman, whether the criticism is justified or not, chances are the language is going to be a mine field.

"The Hottest Governor from the Coolest State?" Spare me. How about campaigning on smarts? How about campaigning on issues? How about a thoughtful debate on how to stop this country's slide into a deepening recession? What do we have to do to get this country to focus on what's important...campaign with bags over our heads?

I have fallen deeply in love with The Daily Show during these few days. Yes, they're partisan and I like their point of view. But it's not that. No one else is ignoring the stupidity and actually looking at the facts...digging up old interviews that clearly show how candidates and party leaders are contradicting themselves. And when they asked GOP delegates to describe just what those hallowed "Small Town Values" they espouse are, all they could come up with was that it meant no same sex marriages. That's it?

Ask the hard questions. Force yourself to think. Mindless following of anyone, no matter how charismatic they may be, is a waste of a vote. Decide what you truly believe in, then find the candidate who reflects that. Or get ready for a very bumpy ride.